PALACE SHOULD STOP ILLEGAL CABINET INFOMERCIALS
By Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago
Sponsorship speech on 24 August 2009
Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate:
The Rhinoceros is Thick-Skinned
The dictionary defines a rhinoceros as a large, powerful, herbivarous, thick-skinned
perissodactyl mammal with two horns. Thus, a rhinoceros is a template for cabinet
members and other executive officials who use public funds, or gifts from so-called
“friends,” to campaign for next year’s elections. They are all thick-skinned and should be
shot on sight.
DBM Should Not Allow Ad Expenses
Last May, the Department of Budget and Management issued the “FY 2010 National
Budget Call.” It is a set of guidelines and procedures in the preparation of the 2010
budget, which the Senate is expected to receive by the end of this month. Under the
heading “Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses,” the DBM allows this item:
“Advertising expenses. Cost of advertisement in newspapers, magazines, television,
radio, and other forms of media.”
We in the Senate do not see advertising expenses as a line item in the annual budget,
because it is hidden under the general item MOOE. This is why cabinet members
routinely abuse this advertising expense account every three years, when an election
approaches. Without legislative oversight, they shamelessly help themselves to these
public funds, on the pretext that they are conducting information campaigns about their
departments.
COA Audit of Advertising Expenses
Greed for and abuse of public funds are proved by the figures from the Commission on
Audit submitted to me, as chair of the economic affairs committee, on 14 August 2009 by
Chair Reynaldo Villar. In 2008–2009, certain cabinet members and other executive
officials, prematurely campaigning for the 2010 elections, used public funds totaling, in

These executive officials can expect to stay in office until the end of November, the
deadline for filing certificates of candidacy, when they will be considered resigned.
Thus, unless we in the Senate will warn them to stop using public funds, they are likely to
intensify their infomercials, and it would be likely that they will incur more expenses –
maybe another P100 million. Their total greed and abuse might then reach a grand total
of P218 million of public funds used for electioneering. One small step to the Senate, a
giant leap in greed and abuse.
2

No Legal Basis for Infomercials
There is no specific legal basis for TV infomercials and other campaign materials which
feature the head of agency. The law merely provides that: “public officials shall provide
information on their policies and procedures.” (R.A. No. 6713, Code of Conduct for
Public Officials, Sec. 4 (A) (e)). This provision should be read in the context of the
Constitution’s Bill of Rights which provides that: “The right of the people to information
on matters of public concern shall be recognized.”
In other words, if a person goes to a government agency and requests information about
policies and procedure, then the agency has a legally demandable duty to provide the
information, unless it might endanger national security. The right is given to the
citizen, not to the agency.
Possibly the only agency required by the Constitution to inform the public is the DOH,
under the provision that the state shall instill health consciousness among the people.
(Article 2, Sec 15).
But even assuming that infomercials have a specific legal basis, there is no legal basis for
the appearance of the head of agency in a state-funded infomercial, particularly when he
is planning to run in the elections. I challenge any of these executive officials to cite any
such specific law. There is none. There is no legal basis for infomercials. They are
illegal.
Timing is Dead Giveaway
If the cabinet officials are merely piously discharging their non-existent duty to expose
themselves to the public, why did they start only in 2008, and why are they going full
speed in 2009, the year before elections? Why didn’t they start publicizing their pious
duty to appear in paid media, specially TV, when they assumed office, many years ago?
Gentlemen of the cabinet, how do you explain the timing of your highly-paid TV
infomercials?
Here is the list of their dates of appointment:
1. Mayor Binay
2. Chair Fernando
3. Chair Syjuco

Assumed Office
30 July 2001
13 June 2002
2004
3

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

VP de Castro
Sec. Duque
Sec. Teves
Sec. Puno
Sec. Lapuz
Sec. Teodoro

30 July 2004
9 June 2005
12 July 2005
6 April 2006
19 July 2006
August 2007

The infomercial should contain information that the public needs to know. What
determines necessity is the public need, not the executive official’s political
agenda. In their blind ignorance, certain cabinet members keep on chanting the
mantra that they need to inform the public. In the optimum, every government
agency and every public official has a duty to inform the public, BUT only if the
public asks. Who ever asked these cabinet members to inflict their grotesque faces
on the TV viewing public?

•

The infomercial should be part of the essential functions of the agency. For
example, infomercials on a “need to know” basis could be issued by DOH
concerning contagious diseases, or by DSWD on emergency assistance for
dangerous calamities. Not any function of the agency will justify infomercials, but
only an extraordinary function under extraordinary conditions. The infomercial
should be essential to the operation of the agency.

•

The infomercial should be authorized by a line item in the budget.

•

The infomercial should have been processed in accordance with R.A. No. 1984.

Almost all of the infomercials flunk this fourfold test for legality. Under COA Circular
No. 85-55-A, expenses for advertisements of anniversaries, etc., in newspapers, TV, or
radio merely for publicity or propaganda purposes are unnecessary and should be
disallowed, except when the nature of the agency’s mission would require such expenses,
as in the case of promotion of trade and business. Here are some COA audit observations
on the greed and abuse of executive officials:

4

Sec. Syjuco. On 27 February 2008, the COA declared as unnecessary, his advertising
expenses in the sum of P12.3 M; on 12 March 2008, the sum of P21.12; M; and on 24
June 2009, the sum of P18.4 M. COA warned him at least three times, but he kept on
spending public money. COA has noted that Mr. Syjuco’s ad with the professional singer
Sarah Geronimo cost the taxpayer P8.3 million.
VP de Castro. He is the unpaid talent for a profusion of housing ads, thus gaining
exposure.
Chair Fernando. He used MMDA funds for giant tarpaulin posters, with his photo
occupying over half of the area of the poster.
Sec. Puno. In 2009, he charged to DILG funds, media greetings on certain occasions,
such as the President’s birthday, Mr. Puno’s own birthday, and the anniversary of the
Tribune newspaper.
Sec. Duque. He appeared in ads concerning dengue, smoking, and generics.
Sec. Lapuz. He appears in ads for Brigada Eskwela, for which DepEd funds were used to
pay the Philippine Information Agency (PIA).
Sec. Pangandaman. DAR ads showed him and the President.
Sec. Ebdane. DPWH ads showed him and the President.
Chair Genuino. He appears in Pagcor ads, which are unnecessary, because Pagcor is a
monopoly. Why advertise a monopoly?
Mayor Binay. He appears in ads extolling the benefits of living in Makati, where he is
mayor, thus making a subliminal pitch for national office.
By admitting that public funds were used for these ads, the executive officials are
admitting that they are guilty of the election offense of using public funds for
electioneering. The Election Code, Sec 261 prohibits any person, under any guise
whatsoever, directly or indirectly, to use public funds for campaigning.
Ads Paid by Friends Constitute Indirect Bribery
The infomercials of Mr. Puno, Mr. Teodoro, and maybe others, purport to be paid by
“friends.” If so, the disclaimer in the TV ads constitute an admission of the crime of
receiving manifestly excessive gifts, as defined by R.A. No. 3019, the Anti-Graft Act.

5

The rate card of a top TV channel charges P475,000 for 30 seconds of prime time. It
appears that the running time of each executive official, ranked from the longest to the
shortest, are as follows:
Chair Fernando

-

6 minutes 56 seconds

Chair Syjuco

-

3 minutes 41 seconds

Sec. Teodoro

-

1 minute 12 seconds

VP de Castro

-

54 seconds

Teodoro, Teves, Genuino,
and Syjuco in 24 Oras -

48 seconds each

Mayor Binay

-

39 seconds

Sec. Puno

-

33 seconds

Sec. Duque

-

29 seconds

Chair Genuino

-

27 seconds

Sec. Lapuz

-

16 seconds

These government officials are spending taxpayers’ money like there’s no tomorrow. If,
as some ads proclaim, they were paid for by friends, the cost would run to hundreds of
millions. Even a gift of P1 million is already considered to be “manifestly excessive.”
We can only calculate that these ad expenses are “arrogantly excessive,” as in walang
hiyaan na ito. We have been invaded by a herd of rhinoceros that are not only thickskinned, but also dimwitted. They are making public admissions of the prohibited act of
accepting a gift which is manifestly excessive.
Under the Rules Implementing the Code of Conduct (R.A. No. 6713) if convicted, they
have to suffer the penalty of imprisonment up to five years, and disqualification to hold
public office.
Recommendations
In this speech, I do not include the issue of premature campaigning, because I have
brought a case to the Supreme Court, where it is pending. It is sub judice, and I refrain

6

from discussing it on the merits, except to express the conviction that certain people are
breaking the law against premature campaign.
Recommendation No. 1. I appeal to my colleagues in this Senate that, when we
deliberate on the budget next month, we should abolish appropriations for advertising. If
we have to keep this line item, we should accompany it with the condition that it should
not feature the agency head, or any political image, or any effort to influence public
support for a political candidate.
These prohibitions have been adopted by other countries. One example is the Guidelines
on Campaign Advertising dated June 2008 by the Australian government department of
finance. Another example is an American law that prohibits public officials from using
the facilities of public office, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of assisting a
campaign for election of any person to any office. (RCW 42.17.130).
Recommendation No. 2. I also appeal to my colleagues that in the 2010 budget, we
should amend Section 59, the “General Provision on the Use of Savings.” We should add
the condition that savings and contingent funds shall not be used to augment the budget
for professional services and for advertising agencies.
Recommendation No. 3. I urge the Comelec to discharge its constitutional duty to:
“Recommend to the Congress, effective measures to minimize election spending.”
Constitution, Art. 9, (C, Sec. (2) (7). Gentlemen of the Comelec, where is your political
will? In effect, you have to assume responsibility for the premature campaigning of these
cabinet candidates, because of your ruling on my petition, which I have elevated to the
Supreme Court. With the avalanche of cabinet infomercials, it has now become clear to
the public that by its refusal to stop premature campaigning on the basis of a technicality,
Comelec opened the way to a slippery slope.
Recommendation No. 4. I urge the COA to disallow all advertising expenses, and to
demand that the executive officials concerned should return to the government the money
they used for their ads.
Recommendation No. 5. I urge Channel 2, under its Boto Mo, Ipatrol Mo campaign;
Channel 7, under its own election watchdog crusade; all other media; and all NGOs
dedicated to honest and clean elections, to file a complaint with the Comelec for this
election offense, against the executive officials I have mentioned, and others doing the
same. If Comelec fails to act on a citizen complaint within four months from filing, I
urge the NGOs to file the complaints with the state prosecutor or the Justice Department.
Recommendation No. 6. I demand that the Press Secretary as head of the
Communications Group in the Office of the President should discharge his duty by
directing all cabinet candidates to stop their infomercials immediately. Executive
7

Order No. 511 dated 2006 creates the Communications Group and requires it to discharge
the function of supervision of public information activities, including advertisements.
At the hearing on 14 August 2009 of the economic affairs committee which I chair, I
directed the executive officials to comply with the law, principally by observing COA
audit criteria, and in any event to remove their images from their infomercials by the end
of August.
If there is no objection from our colleagues, I shall proceed to send a copy of this
privilege speech to the Ombudsman, Comelec, and the Secretary of Justice, with my
cover letter requesting criminal prosecution by October, if the executive officials refuse
to be educated on the law, and continue their mad pursuit of public office by illegal and
depraved use of public funds.
Tags: illegal infomercials, corruption

24aug2009 Illegal Infomercials

COA Audit of Advertising Expenses By Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago The Rhinoceros is Thick­Skinned Greed for and abuse of public funds are proved by the figures from the Commission on Audit submitted to me, as chair of the economic affairs committee, on 14 August 2009 by Chair Reynaldo Villar. In 2008–2009, certain cabinet members and other executive Sponsorship speech on 24 August 2009 Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate: